Lars Brinkhoff <lars@...> writes:
> William Harold Newman <william.newman@...> writes:
>> After offers on #lisp to test it, I decided to change the PPC code as
>> well as the X86 code, and now both are in CVS.
>
> Excellent!
You know, something just occurred to me about this; I think the
uname(2) system call is defined by POSIX to operate on struct utsname
objects that contain a machine field; it had "sun4u" and "i686" on the
sparc/SunOS and x86/Linux machines I just tried it on. If we can live
with the loss of detail, we could make MACHINE-VERSION use uname()
instead, which would enable it to be a general, not machine-specific,
function.
Cheers,
Christophe
--
http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/ +44 1223 510 299/+44 7729 383 757
(set-pprint-dispatch 'number (lambda (s o) (declare (special b)) (format s b)))
(defvar b "~&Just another Lisp hacker~%") (pprint #36rJesusCollegeCambridge)

William Harold Newman <william.newman@...> writes:
> After offers on #lisp to test it, I decided to change the PPC code as
> well as the X86 code, and now both are in CVS.
Excellent!
> + ;; The field "model name" exists on kernel 2.4.21-rc6-ac1
> + ;; anyway, with values e.g.
> + ;; "AMD Athlon(TM) XP 2000+"
> + ;; "Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1300MHz"
> + ;; which seem comparable to the information in the example
> + ;; in the MACHINE-VERSION page of the ANSI spec.
According to
http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c?v=2.0.39
there was no "model name" field in ancient Linux version, but it
existed in kernels considered quite old now:
http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c?v=2.2.20
.